Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hyperpaths enumeration is one of the basic procedures in many traffic planning issues. As a result of its distinctive structure, hyperpaths in Urban Rail Transit Network (URTN) are different from those in road network. Typically, one may never visit a station more than once and would never transfer from one line to another that has been visited in a loopless URTN, meaning that stations a hyperpath traversed cannot be repeated, neither do lines in loopless networks. This paper studies the relationships between feasible path and the shortest path in terms of travel costs. In this paper, a new definition of hyperpath in URTN is proposed and a new algorithm based on the breadth first searching (BFS) method is presented to enumerate the hyperpaths. The algorithm can safely avoid hyperpath omission and can even be applied in networks containing loops as well. The influence of parameters on hyperpaths is studied by experimentally finding hyperpaths in the subway network in Beijing. A group of suggested parameter pairs are then given. Finally, a numerical experiment is used to illustrate the validity of the proposed algorithm. The results imply the significance of the convergence of the BFS algorithm which can be used to search hyperpaths in large scale URTN even with loop.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".